2022 World Cup - General Discussion & Non-USA teams thread
- Thread starter Tom McAndrew
- Start date
Japan nearly with a goal to take the lead, but it appears the ball went OOB over the goal line just before the pass to the attacker that scored.
Edit: After VAR, it's a GOAL. 2-1, Japan over Spain early in the 2nd half
Edit: After VAR, it's a GOAL. 2-1, Japan over Spain early in the 2nd half
Last edited:
And Costa Rica ties it up in the 57th minute. This afternoon's games are unbelievable.
1-1, Costa Rica - Germany
1-1, Costa Rica - Germany
I thought it might have been a handball, but if so zero chance VAR would have missed it.
You’re not actually listening to what I’m saying. You just want to argue, and make it some kind of weird rush to defend soccer’s honor, for some reason. Have a nice day.
Germany with a goal in the 84th minute. 3-2, Germany over Costa Rica. just a textbook finish by Germany.
Just amazing
Just amazing
I’ve switched to Japan-Spain, four minutes of stoppage time left. Germany has done all they could, win by at least two goals. If Spain manages to tie, Spain and Germany move on.
sorry, I switched to the Spain - Japan match. Can't help you on a rule interp for a play I didn't see.
Final: Japan defeats Spain, 2-1. Japan finishes 1st in Group E, Spain finishes 2nd, and German is out of the tournament.
Un-be-liev-able
what an afternoon of soccer. it doesn't get much better.
Un-be-liev-able
what an afternoon of soccer. it doesn't get much better.
It will be Japan and Spain moving on. Happy for the Japanese fans, awesome fans, none better.
so I finally saw the play. Germany has a player in an offside position (in part because he pushed the CR defender, which could have been called). Another German player from outside the box sends in a centering pass toward the far post. A German attacker runs toward the pass. He was very, very close to being offside. However, he was not called offside by the AR. That player then gets to the ball, and chests it backward to his teammate -- the aforementioned guy that was in the offside position when the pass was made. When the ball is touched by the attacker that chested it backward, it resets things. If he had chested it forward to a teammate who kicked it in, that teammate would have been offside. Because he chested it backward to the aforementioned teammate, who then kicked the ball in, there was no offside on the play.
All scores are reviewed by VAR. Based on that, we can presume that the attacker that I mentioned as being very, very close to being offside was not offside.
I hope that helps.
Last edited:
So if the German player in the box had chested the ball forward instead of backward, it would have been offsides?
Last edited by a moderator:
Alexi Lalas can be a blowhard at times.
On the 2nd goal by Japan, I freely acknowledge that it's debatable as to whether the ball was over the goal line before it was passed to the attacker that scored. Unless we are provided with all the video that the VAR officials looked at, that debate will never be resolved.
The ruling by VAR was that it was indeterminate as to whether or not the ball was out of bounds. As such, the ruling on the field stands.
Lalas keeps going on and on that the AR raised the flag. However, on the far half of the goal line (i.e., the part of the goal line on the other side of the goal from the AR), the decision on whether or not it's OOB is made by the center ref. FWIW, even on the same side of the goal as the AR, the AR's raising of the flag to signal OOB is taken as a recommendation or guidance, but the ruling is still left to the center ref. Most of the time the center ref will go with the AR's ruling, but they do not have to if they have a different opinion. The final decision is left to the center ref. So, despite what Lalas is claiming, the ruling on the field is not based on what the AR did, but on what the center ref called.
To expand a bit upon this, for @ 5 years before VAR was first employed in 2016, FIFA allowed goal-line judges to be employed along the goal line, in addition to the 3 refs. Their responsibility was solely for the goal line, primarily to determine whether or not a ball in the goal completely crossed the goal line. For reasons that never made a lot of sense to me, the goal line refs were placed on the same side of the field/goal line as were the ARs. So while they were an improvement on determining whether or not a ball crossed the line, they at times got in the way of the AR seeing whether a ball crossed the goal line outside of the goal.
The area of the goal line that is absolutely the most difficult for the AR to make calls on is just on the other side of the goal from where they are standing. The two goal posts, and at times the goalie and players, are between the AR and the goal line, and you can't see through them. That's why the center ref is responsible for calls on that part of the line.
On the 2nd goal by Japan, I freely acknowledge that it's debatable as to whether the ball was over the goal line before it was passed to the attacker that scored. Unless we are provided with all the video that the VAR officials looked at, that debate will never be resolved.
The ruling by VAR was that it was indeterminate as to whether or not the ball was out of bounds. As such, the ruling on the field stands.
Lalas keeps going on and on that the AR raised the flag. However, on the far half of the goal line (i.e., the part of the goal line on the other side of the goal from the AR), the decision on whether or not it's OOB is made by the center ref. FWIW, even on the same side of the goal as the AR, the AR's raising of the flag to signal OOB is taken as a recommendation or guidance, but the ruling is still left to the center ref. Most of the time the center ref will go with the AR's ruling, but they do not have to if they have a different opinion. The final decision is left to the center ref. So, despite what Lalas is claiming, the ruling on the field is not based on what the AR did, but on what the center ref called.
To expand a bit upon this, for @ 5 years before VAR was first employed in 2016, FIFA allowed goal-line judges to be employed along the goal line, in addition to the 3 refs. Their responsibility was solely for the goal line, primarily to determine whether or not a ball in the goal completely crossed the goal line. For reasons that never made a lot of sense to me, the goal line refs were placed on the same side of the field/goal line as were the ARs. So while they were an improvement on determining whether or not a ball crossed the line, they at times got in the way of the AR seeing whether a ball crossed the goal line outside of the goal.
The area of the goal line that is absolutely the most difficult for the AR to make calls on is just on the other side of the goal from where they are standing. The two goal posts, and at times the goalie and players, are between the AR and the goal line, and you can't see through them. That's why the center ref is responsible for calls on that part of the line.
yes or no; it depends.
yes if he chested it forward to a player that was ahead of him, and also ahead of the 2nd to the last defender
no if he chested it forward and a player that was behind him ran up and kicked the ball in
Get unlimited access today.